On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> But it is very effective at avoiding 4 out of the 5 writes you mention.
For the "common case," would we not want to have (1) [WAL] and (2)
[Writing the pre-frozen tuple]?
If we only write the tuple (2), and don't capture WAL, then the COPY
wouldn't be replicable, right?
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira||Date: 2012-02-29 18:15:53|
|Subject: Re: LIST OWNED BY...|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-02-29 18:12:08|
|Subject: Re: Parameterized-path cost comparisons need some work|